September 26, 2016Human genome editingThe Japan Times (Opinion)An international summit on human gene editing held in December in Washington, hosted by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Britain’s Royal Society, issued an statement which pointed out that “permanent genetic ‘enhancements’ to subsets of the population could exacerbate social inequalities or be used coercively.”

July 6, 2016Obama’s top scientist talks shrinking budgets, Donald Trump, and his biggest regretNatureAnd in fact, when the current round of interest in gene editing emerged with the rise of the CRISPR technology, the [US] National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine gathered leading scientists from all over the world in a format very much like Asilomar [a landmark conference in 1975 that set rules for research on recombinant DNA], but strongly inter¬national.

May 4, 2016Embryology policy: Revisit the 14-day ruleNature (Opinion)There are precedents for this type of international discourse. In response to the development of powerful gene-editing technologies such as CRISPR–Cas9, the U.S. National Academy of Science, the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, Britain's Royal Society and the Chinese Academy of Sciences jointly hosted an international summit in December last year to discuss scientific, ethical and governance issues raised by the research. The second component of this initiative — a science and policy review and report on human gene editing — is ongoing.

April 28, 2016China gets into the genetic breakthrough businessCNNDiscussions about these sensitive and controversial issues are taking place at a high level globally, including the recent International Summit on Human Gene Editing, organized by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences and medicine, the Royal Society in London and the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

April 4, 2016Op-ed: Minding our makeupVarsityIn December 2015, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) held an international summit on Human Gene Editing after the Chinese Academy of Scientists asked for a ban on clinical use of human germ line editing.

In Dec. 2015, an international group of scientists gathered at the National Academy of Sciences to call for a moratorium on making inheritable changes to the human genome until there is a “broad societal consensus about the appropriateness” of any proposed change.

In December 2015, an international group of scientists gathered at the National Academy of Sciences to call for a moratorium on making inheritable changes to the human genome until there is a “broad societal consensus about the appropriateness” of any proposed change.

A meeting convened in December 2015 by the U.S. National Academies of Sciences and Medicine, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society of London recommended such a moratorium in light of multiple safety and ethical concerns.

February 19, 2016Facts About Gene Editing As Britain Oks StudyMacau Daily NewsIn December, international scientists and ethicists gathered at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences declared that while gene-editing is nowhere near ready to use for pregnancy, altering early embryos as part of careful laboratory research should be allowed even as society grapples with the ethical questions.

The group, convened by the National Academy of Sciences and scientists from China and Britain, said it would be "irresponsible to proceed" with such research until there was "broad societal consensus" on whether making inheritable changes to the human genome was appropriate.

In December, international scientists and ethicists gathered at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences declared that while gene-editing is nowhere near ready to use for pregnancy, altering early embryos as part of careful laboratory research should be allowed even as society grapples with the ethical questions.

February 5, 2016Human Embryo Gene Editing Gets Go-Ahead in U.K.Science FridayWe had a global summit sponsored by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the United States Academy and the United Kingdom Academies and was held in Washington in December and our organizing committee, which really endorsed the need for the research we’re talking about today that’s been approved in the U.K. as long as it remains laboratory based.

February 3, 2016Britain's new gene technology gets the go-aheadHealth24In December, international scientists and ethicists gathered at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences declared that while gene-editing is nowhere near ready to use for pregnancy, altering early embryos as part of careful laboratory research should be allowed even as society grapples with the ethical questions.

February 1, 2016Facts about gene editing as Britain OKs studyAssociated PressIn December, international scientists and ethicists gathered at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences declared that while gene-editing is nowhere near ready to use for pregnancy, altering early embryos as part of careful laboratory research should be allowed even as society grapples with the ethical questions.

December 28, 2015Should We Engineer Future Humans?Pacific StandardTo their credit, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the United Kingdom's Royal Academy convened a global summit in early December, where they held open debates about the ethical issues raised by gene editing and converged around a set of norms: They decided that research with CRISPR should continue, but that a moratorium should be placed on engineering human embryos that result in pregnancies.

December 26, 2015The breakthrough in gene editingJournalStar (editorial)An international panel of scientists at the Human Gene Editing Summit at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington D.C. earlier this month issued a statement that gene editing on human DNA should be restricted.

December 26, 2015San Diego: Ground Zero for 2015's social changesThe San Diego Union-Tribune Earlier this month, the influential National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine released a statement at its International Summit on Human Gene Editing calling for broader regulatory oversight — and raising moral concerns that “‘permanent genetic enhancements’ to subsets of the population could exacerbate social inequities or be used coercively.”

December 18, 2015A Pause to Weigh Risks of Gene EditingNew York Times (Opinion) An international panel of experts has wisely called for a pause in using the technique to produce genetic changes that could be inherited by future generations…The international panel calling for a pause met in Washington this month at the National Academy of Sciences and was jointly convened by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society of London.

December 16, 2015Can The Creation of 'Human GMOs' Cure Genetic Diseases?Forbes (Opinion) The move toward prohibition gained ground at a conference held in Washington DC in early December under the auspices of National Academies of Science of the United States, China and the U.K.

December 16, 2015CRISPR BlossomsThe ScientistThe debate culminated in an international summit held at the National Academy of Sciences building in Washington, DC, earlier this month.

December 16, 2015R&D Challenges and Opportunities in 2016R & D Magazine The International Summit on Human Gene Editing—hosted by the U.S. National Academies, UK Royal Society and the Chinese Academy of Sciences—concluded on Dec. 3 after three days of discussion on the scientific, ethical and governance issues associated with human gene editing technologies like CRISPR.

The LancetDec 1-3, 2015, experts from the leading international scientific groups in this domain at the Gene Editing Summit held at the National Academy of Sciences and the National, co-hosted with the Academy of Medicine Chinese Academy of Sciences and the UK's Royal Society.

December 11, 2015The great potential — and great risks — of gene editing Washington Post- Opinion A good sign that the scientific community is taking concerns such as these seriously is the organization by the National Academy of Sciences of a Committee on Gene Drive Research in Non-Human Organisms.December 11, 2015Germline editing dominates DNA summitScience Magazine (subscription) In response, the National Academy of Sciences and Medicine, the United Kingdom's Royal Society, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences rushed to convene the summit.

December 9, 2015 If You Could Design Your Baby's Genes, Would You?POLITICO Magazine On the contrary, in a statement issued last week at a landmark International Summit on Human Gene Editing at the National Academies in Washington, D.C., which drew more than 400 people—including biologists, physicians, and social scientists, lawyers, philosophers and bioethicists, academic, medical and government administrators, corporate investors and biotechnologists, advocates for women as well as patients, reporters, editors and this historian—the panel of experts that organized the conference strongly cautioned against the editing of human embryos.

December 9, 2015 The Ethics Of Gene EditingWGBH NEWS It is truly a brave new world as gene editing goes from a science fiction trope in movies like Gattaca, to becoming a real world solution to eradicating some of our deadliest diseases. Last week, geneticists, lawyers, ethicists and a few patient groups, joined together at the National Academy of Sciences to discuss the moral implications of using CRISPR 9, an accurate gene editing technique.

December 8, 2015Future-proofingNature (Editorial) While environmentalists search for new technologies to safeguard the future, biologists have a whole box of new tools that can reveal and manipulate the genome. As we report on page 173, the atmosphere at the Washington meeting — convened to discuss the implications of human-gene-editing techniques — was cordial and hopeful.

December 7, 2015‘Kill Switches’ Keep GMOs on a Short LeashDiscover Magazine Just last week, an international summit on human gene editing was convened in Washington D.C. to discuss ethical guidelines for future gene editing research, among other agenda items.

December 7, 2015Why treat gene editing differently in two types of human cells?The Conversation Co-organized by US, UK and Chinese national academies, the summit gathered preeminent researchers, clinicians and ethicists to grapple with how new gene editing technologies – particularly the method known as CRISPR – should be used.

December 6, 2015 Excitement rises over gene editing toolFinancial Times These matters were scheduled to be discussed last week at a meeting convened in Washington by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences to examine human gene-editing.

December 3, 2015No designer babies, but summit calls for cautious researchAssociated Press "As scientific knowledge advances and societal views evolve, the clinical use of germline editing should be revisited on a regular basis," the committee concluded. It urged the sponsors of this week's summit — the scientific Academies of the U.S., Britain and China — to create an international forum to help "establish norms concerning acceptable uses of human germline editing."

December 3, 2015 Gene summit organizers urge caution on human gene editingReuters Scientists and ethicists gathered at an international summit in Washington said it would be "irresponsible" to use gene editing technology in human embryos for therapeutic purposes, such as to correct genetic diseases, until safety and efficacy issues are resolved.

But the summit statement, authored by a 12-member organizing committee, cautioned that many technical and ethical issues should be settled before anyone attempts ‘germline’ editing — the deletion of a gene prenatally in an effort to erase an inherited disease from an embryo and prevent it from being passed on to future generations. The three-day international summit took place at the the U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine in Washington DC. The meeting was jointly hosted by the US academies, the UK Royal Society and the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

December 3, 2015 All Gene-Editing Research Should Proceed Cautiously, Scientists ConcludeScientific American Tweaking the human genome with current and future gene-editing tools could lead to sophisticated treatments and prevention strategies for disease. The promise of those applications is reason enough to move forward with such work in the lab and clinic, albeit cautiously, the dozen scientists and bioethicists who organized the International Summit on Human Gene Editing said today after three days of deliberation and presentations in Washington, D.C.

There's no reason to stop scientists from doing gene editing, experts agreed Thursday, but researchers need to be careful and no one's ready yet to do "germline" editing that could be passed to future generations…The meeting, sponsored by the National Science Academies of the U.S., Britain and China, has no power to make anyone do anything. But the organizers managed to get broad buy-in from many, if not most, of the researchers who know how to do genetic manipulation for medical purposes.

The international summit in Washington was organized by the National Academies of the US, UK and China to take stock of powerful new tools that can make precision changes to the code of life, by correcting, removing and adding DNA to an organism’s genome.

Committee members called on the summit's host organizations, The National Academy of Sciences, The Academy of Medicine, the British Royal Society and the Chinese Academy of Sciences, to create an ongoing forum for discussion of the technique and its uses.

In a separate statement, the presidents of the four National Academies, that cohosted the summit thank the leaders of the summit for their "thoughtful concluding statement and welcome their call for us to continue to lead a global discussion on issues related to human gene editing."

December 3, 2015 Gene editing: Don't use in human reproduction, panel saysSan Jose Mercury News The decision was reached after a three-day International Summit in Washington, D.C. about the cheap, fast, precise and powerful way to "edit" DNA using the controversial technology called CRISPR, first conceived by UC Berkeley molecular biologist Jennifer Doudna.

Making “designer babies” by genetic engineering is irresponsible, hundreds of scientists urged at a conference on Thursday. They called for a delay in fertility clinic use of the promising new technology until scientists figure out the safety risks and the general public grapples with a coming era of genetic engineering.

At fertilization, you are dealt a genetic hand of cards. Your genome largely dictates whether you will be short or tall, able to taste certain chemicals, or prone to some types of cancer. But what if it were possible to stack the deck? That was the question facing the International Summit on Human Gene Editing, a public meeting convened with an organizing committee of 10 scientists and 2 bioethicists to address the ethical and biomedical ramifications of powerful new genetic technologies.

December 3, 2015Global summit opens door to controversial gene editing of human embryosSTAT The committee therefore called on the U.S. National Academies of Sciences and Medicine, Britain’s Royal Society, and the Chinese Academy of Sciences — which jointly hosted the meeting — “to take the lead in creating an ongoing international forum to discuss potential clinical uses of gene editing.”

The conference at the National Academies of Sciences was called because a revolutionary way of editing genes — known as CRISPR-Cas9 — allows many scientists to alter genes in plants and animals quickly and inexpensively.

But just because we have the power to do something doesn't mean we should. And talking about what scientists should do with CRISPR was the point of the international summit at the National Academy of Sciences.

Xconomy Now that the summit has wrapped up, a committee convened by the U.S. National Academies will begin work on a comprehensive report on human gene editing that Baltimore said should be available by the end of 2016.

Thought leaders, scientists and policy makers from both countries are holding a historic summit in Washington this week to debate the question of "when, if ever, we will want to use gene editing to change human inheritance," as David Baltimore of Caltech, the summit chairman, put it in his opening remarks.

December 3, 2015 International gene editing conference declines to ban eventual use in humansLos Angeles Times With questions of safety, need and ethics still unanswered, the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine; the United Kingdom's Royal Society; and the Chinese Academy of Science agreed that "it would be irresponsible to proceed with any clinical use of germline editing."

December 3, 2015 BBC World NewsKOAB (PBS) Should scientists be allowed to do research which alters the DNA of human embryos? It is a question being discussed by hundreds of scientists from 20 countries in Washington, at a conference on what is known as gene editing.

Concerns about how the use of CRISPR could go wrong are partly what spurred the conference, which is organized jointly by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the U.K. Royal Society, and will focus on the ethics of editing human DNA.

December 1, 2015The Future Of Gene Editing Is Being Decided Right NowPopular ScienceThe summit, which started early this morning, is sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, as well as the Royal Academy, and will include researchers from the United States, Great Britain, and China as well as representatives from at least 20 countries worldwide.

December 1, 2015Is gene editing going too far? Ethical boundaries debated at historic summit.Christian Science Monitor On Tuesday, scientists from the around the world convened for the first international summit to debate the benefits and risks of gene editing. The conference, held at the National Academies of Sciences in Washington, and co-hosted by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Britain's Royal Society, will run from Dec. 1-3.

December 1, 2015 Everything You Need to Know About CRISPR Gene Editing’s Monster YearMIT Technology ReviewThis week several hundred scientists and bioethicists are meeting at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, DC, to debate one of the most charged questions raised by CRISPR: whether we should ever use it to correct disease-causing genes in people before they’re born.

Berkeley NewsThe conference, to be held at the National Academy of Sciences and streamed live Dec. 1-3, is co-sponsored by the National Academy of Medicine and co-hosted with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the U.K.’s Royal Society.

The conference, to be held at the National Academy of Sciences and streamed live December 1-3, is co-sponsored by the National Academy of Medicine and co-hosted with the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the U.K.’s Royal Society.

December 1, 2015The promise of gene editingBBC NewsJointly organized by the National Academy of Sciences, the Royal Society of London and the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the three day meeting will examine the potential of gene editing as well as its risks.

December 1, 2015What rules should we have for genetically editing humans?Ars TechnicaThe summit, co-hosted by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, U.S. National Academy of Medicine, Chinese Academy of Sciences, and the UK's Royal Society, is the start of a larger effort by the US National Academies to come up with a consensus study on the use of editing technology.

Jointly organized by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the UK Royal Society, the meeting is expected to draw representatives from more than 20 countries, including India, Sweden and Nigeria.

Financial TimesAn encouraging sign of this process is the key role played by the Chinese Academy of Sciences in organising a meeting on gene editing in Washington next week, along with the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and UK’s Royal Society.

November 25, 2015Gene editing: Govern ability expectationsNature From a disability-rights viewpoint, problems that have dogged the debate on human genetic modification also pervade your curtain-raiser to the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine conference.

November 25, 2015Gene editing: Survey invites opinionsNature As the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine summit on the regulation of CRISPR–Cas9 gene-editing tools gets under way, we invite readers to contribute their opinions about this technology and its use to a survey at go.nature.com/eyowaf.

November 17, 2015 China's Bold Push into Genetically Customized AnimalsScientific American In early December scientists from the U.S., U.K. and China will meet at the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., in an effort to codify international consensus on editing DNA, focusing on the human germ line.

November 17, 2015Defensive drivesNature (Editorial) This has understandably raised some safety concerns, and the U.S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, for example, has convened a committee to evaluate uses of gene drives.

November 16, 2015Safety upgrade found for gene-editing techniqueNature But the publication kicked off concerns that the gene drive might escape from the lab into the wild, and the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine tasked a committee with evaluating the benefits and risks of the technology.

November 12, 2015 Can CRISPR Avoid the Monsanto Problem?The New Yorker Early next month, the National Academy of Sciences will convene an international conference devoted to the ethical use of this powerful new tool.

November 5, 2015Leukaemia success heralds wave of gene-editing therapiesNature In a study presented in October at a meeting of the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine Sangamo senior scientist Fyodor Urnov reported that his group had injected 15 monkeys with viruses that carried genes encoding ZFN and normal versions of factor IX — a blood-clotting protein produced by the liver, which is mutated in people with haemophilia B.

October 29, 2015Gene drive workshop shows technology's promise, or peril, remains far offScience But a workshop hosted yesterday by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS) in Washington, D.C., made abundantly clear that a lot of uncertainty—scientific and regulatory—still exists for the so-called gene-drive technology at the heart of such concepts.

October 28, 2015Ben Carson: The candidate from bioethicsThe HillThe National Academies, along with science organizations around the world, are discussing the use of new technologies that can redesign or “edit” the genes in embryos.

October 13, 2015Where in the world could the first CRISPR baby be born?Nature “The truth is, we have guidelines but some people never follow them,” said Qi Zhou, a developmental biologist at the Chinese Academy of Sciences Institute of Zoology in Beijing, at a meeting hosted by the US National Academy of Sciences in Washington DC last week.

September 22, 2015Genome Editing, Bioethics, Policy and Politics in the UK and in the USHuffington Post (Opinion)Only yesterday, after the news of Niakan's application to the HFEA, the NIH has reiterated the ban on applications of CRISPR/Cas9 to human embryos. A meeting of the National Academy of Sciences to discuss human genome editing applications is planned for early December in DC.

September 18, 2015UK scientists apply for licence to edit genes in human embryosScience And on 14 September, Britain's Royal Society and the Chinese Academy of Sciences announced that they would join forces with the US National Academy of Sciences and the US National Academy of Medicine to host a summit in December on germline editing (genetic changes to embryos, sperm and eggs).

September 11, 2015Tide Shifting on Embryo Gene Editing?The Scientist The group's statement “seems weak on addressing why we should single out genome editing relative to other medicines,” he wrote in an email to Science. The National Academies of Science is set to hold a summit on genome editing technologies this December.

September 1, 2015Medical specialists urge more debate on gene-editing technologyReutersThe U.S. National Academy of Sciences and its Institute of Medicine are due to convene an international summit this year for researchers and other experts to explore the scientific, ethical, and policy issues associated with human gene-editing research.

September 1, 2015CRISPR Cash: Intellia The Latest Gene-Editing Firm To Nab Big MoneyXconomy Work in human cells has emerged, too, sparking fears that altered reproductive cells or embryos—the human germline—would be used to make babies engineered for looks or intelligence, for example. The U.S. National Academies are planning an international summit later this year.

August 23, 2015Editing humanity requires rulesWinnipeg Free Press (Opinion)The U.S. National Academy of Sciences plans a conference to delve into CRISPR's ethics. The discussion is sorely needed. CRISPR is a boon, but it raises profound questions.

August 22, 2015The age of the red penThe Economist America's National Academies of Science are convening a gathering in December to look at the options. Genetics is a peculiarly personal science, but it is also one very prone to politics. The power of CRISPR looks sure to exacerbate that propensity.

August 4, 2015Driving testNature (Editorial) Last week, the debate gained momentum when the US National Academy of Sciences held its first meeting to evaluate the potential benefits and risks of gene drives.

July 28, 2015National Academies to Establish Human Gene Editing GuidelinesThe Journal of the American Medical Association The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) announced May 18 that the organizations are jointly launching an initiative to develop decision-making guidelines for human gene editing.

July 28, 2015Easy DNA Editing Will Remake the World. Buckle Up.WiredA month later, the US National Academy of Sciences announced that it would create a set of recommendations for scientists, policymakers, and regulatory agencies on when, if ever, embryonic engineering might be permissible. Another National Academy report will focus on gene drives. Though those recommendations don't carry the weight of law, federal funding in part determines what science gets done, and agencies that fund research around the world often abide by the academy's guidelines.

July 9, 2015Last scientist in Congress warns on human genetic engineeringThe Hill So serious is the potential for CRISPR and related tools that the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine recently announced that they will launch a major international initiative to develop guidelines for human gene editing.

July 1, 2015Gene politicsNatureOn 16 June, a subcommittee of the US House Committee on Space, Science and Technology held a hearing on human gene editing with witnesses who included Jennifer Doudna, a biochemist at the University of California, Berkeley, who was one of the inventors of the genome-editing system CRISPR, and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) president Victor Dzau.June 30, 2015Lawmakers Try to Stop Embryo Editing and Three-Parent EmbryosNewsweekAdditionally, the bill would require the FDA to appoint a panel bioethicists and experts from religious-based medical organizations to review a soon-to-be-published report from the Institute of Medicine that examines the controversy of human embryo editing. The report will review the research projects already in progress on embryo editing, and also outline its potential uses in the field of reproductive medicine and genetics.

June 29, 2015Lawmakers Move to Ban Funding For Human Embryo EditingPopular Science The FDA has been keeping its eye on this kind of research for a long time, which is why it commissioned a report by the U.S. Institute of Medicine to uncover the implications for it, so far the agency has not given any indication that it would actually sponsor this kind of research.

June 24, 2015CRISPR: Move beyond differencesNaturePlans for the international meeting were announced by the US National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine after a study was published in which researchers used a gene-editing tool known as CRISPR to modify the genomes of non-viable human embryos.

June 23, 2015CRISPR: Science can't solve itNatureLeaders of the scientific community are ready to share the responsibility for these powerful technologies with the public. George Church, a geneticist at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and others wrote last year of CRISPR that “the decision of when and where to apply this technology, and for what purposes, will be in our collective hands”. But scientists also want to control the terms of engagement. The US National Academies, for example, will “guide decision making” by convening researchers and other experts later this year “to explore the scientific, ethical and policy issues associated with human gene-editing research”.

June 11, 2015For Genome Editing, Self-Regulation Beats A Government BanForbes August organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine just announced that they’ll host a meeting this fall to try to wrestle some of the thorny issues raised by the ability to alter genomes.

June 9, 2015A Moratorium on Gene EditingLaboratory Equipment In addition, the researchers urged a national debate on how to proceed. Shortly after, the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine announced a new initiative to guide decision-making on human gene editing.

June 4, 2015National academies move to design regulations on germline editingGenetic Literacy Project The National Academies of Science (NAS) and National Academies of Medicine (NAM) have their work cut out for them as they begin hashing out under what circumstances, if any, should researchers carry out germline editing of human genomes.

June 4, 2015Lander Weighs in on Issues Raised by Germline Genome EditingGenomeWeb With an international conference scheduled for this fall by the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine to discuss wide-ranging implications of human germline editing, Lander voiced the need for a framework to evaluate the topic.

June 3, 2015CRISPR, the disruptorNatureThe US National Research Council has formed a panel to discuss gene drives, and other high-level discussions are starting to take place.

June 3, 2015Human germline gene editing too complex for black-and-white moral framingGenetic Literacy ProjectThe first day of BEINGS2015, “A Gathering of Global Thought Leaders to Reach Consensus on the Direction of Biotechnology for the 21st Century”, in Atlanta, coincided with the announcement by the National Academy of Science and National Academy of Medicine of an initiative to look into “promising new treatments for disease,” given that “recent experiments to attempt to edit human genes also have raised important questions about the potential risks and ethical concerns of altering the human germline.”

May 28, 2015The Lessons of Asilomar for Today’s ScienceThe New York Times (Opinion)In 1973, scientists who were using novel molecular techniques to splice DNA between different organisms asked the National Academy of Sciences to consider the potential hazards as they might affect the public.

May 27, 2015The White House Supports A Proposed Ban On Editing The Human GermlineIo9In response to these concerns, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and its National Academy of Medicine have announced an international meeting to be held this fall in which researchers, bioethicists, and other experts will discuss the implications of human germline gene-editing technologies in both research and clinical applications.

May 26, 2015A Note on Genome EditingThe White HouseThe White House applauds NAS and NAM for convening this dialogue and fully supports a robust review of the ethical issues associated with using gene-editing technology to alter the human germline.

May 26, 2015White House: ethics of human genome editing needs further reviewReuters The National Academy of Sciences said last week it would convene an international summit this fall to explore the ethical and policy issues associated with the research and appoint an international committee to recommend guidelines for the technology.

May 26, 2015US scientists to write CRISPR 'rulebook'BioNews Two major not-for-profit US organisations, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the Institute of Medicine (IoM), are planning an international summit in the Autumn as part of an attempt to agree clinical and ethical standards on the future use and development of the technology.

May 26, 2015Gene-Editing: Hold Off For Now, White House SaysNBC NewsThe National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) said last week they'd hold an international meeting this fall for discussion of the issue.

May 22, 2015Tackling embryo gene editingScienceResponding to an uproar over attempts to genetically modify human embryos, the U.S. National Academies is launching an international initiative to discuss this ethically fraught area.

May 22, 2015Scientists question ethics of 'designer babies'Health24In response, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and its Institute of Medicine will convene an international summit this fall where researchers and other experts will "explore the scientific, ethical, and policy issues associated with human gene-editing research", the academies said in a statement.

May 20, 2015Scientists to thrash out rules on genetically modified humansIndependent Despite the fact that these embryos were reportedly ‘non-viable’, the work has spurred the US National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Medicine to create a rulebook of what the scientific community considers to be acceptable use of the gene-editing system called CRISPR-Cas9 which allows mutated sequences of DNA to be removed from a fertilized ovum.

May 19, 2015Top US scientists want guidelines on editing human genomesThe Verge The National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine said this week that they would launch an initiative to develop guidelines for editing human genomes — a subject that's raised long-simmering, radical ethical issues.

May 19, 2015Five things for pharma marketers to knowMedical Marketing & Media The National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine will hold an international summit to discuss ethical and scientific issues associated with gene editing. Reuters reported that the fall conference will focus on CRISPR-Cas9 technology that “allows scientists to edit virtually any gene they target.” This new technology is associated with claims that it could create “designer babies.”

May 18, 2015US science academies take on human-genome editingNature The US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) will launch a major initiative to develop guidelines for editing human genomes, they said on 18 May.

May 18, 2015U.S. science leaders to tackle ethics of gene-editing technologyReuters In response, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and its Institute of Medicine will convene an international summit this fall where researchers and other experts will "explore the scientific, ethical, and policy issues associated with human gene-editing research," the academies said in a statement.

May 18, 2015National academies will meet to guide 'gene editing' researchSan Jose Mercury News The landmark conference, announced Monday by the Washington, D.C.-based National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Medicine, will gather researchers and other experts to review and explore the scientific, ethical and social implications of the practice, which can "cut and paste" gene sequences.